Izvestiya of Saratov University.

Philosophy. Psychology. Pedagogy

ISSN 1819-7671 (Print)
ISSN 2542-1948 (Online)

Full text:
(downloads: 31)
Article type: 

Main (Grundfrage) and leading (Leitfrage) questions about being: Claim for ancient understanding

Bogatov Mikhail Alexandrovich, Saratov State University

The article is devoted to the question of being in Heidegger’s fundamental ontology, namely, his claim to understand the ancient idea of being. In his work “Contributions to Philosophy (From Enowning)”, Heidegger distinguishes between the understanding of being as the being of everything that exists and his own understanding of being as such, out of connection with things. He calls the first point the “leading question” and attributes its authorship to Aristotle, the second one – “the main question”. The article discusses the relationship of these issues, the possibility of their formal coincidence and discrepancy between them. The first part of the article introduces the context of Heidegger’s thought. It deals with the “ontological difference” that Heidegger introduces in the framework of “Being and Time”, as well as with what transformation this difference undergoes in his later works, after the “turn” (“Kehre”). In the second part of the article, attention is drawn to the convergence and divergence of the “leading question” from the “main one” by clarifying the ontology of Aristotle. Particular attention is paid to various ways of understanding existence, in particular – an incidental and accidental existence. At the end of the article, the attempt will be made to reconstruct the direction of Heidegger's thought, based on the results of consideration achieved earlier.

  1. Heidegger M. Contributions to Philosophy (From Enowning). Bloomington, Indiana University Press, 1999. 456 p. (Russ. ed.: Khaydegger M. K fi losofi i (O sobytii). Moscow, Izdatel’stvo Instituta Gajdara, 2020. 640 p.).
  2. Heidegger M. Holzwege. Frankfurt am Main, Vittorio Klostermann GmbH, 1950. 345 S. (Russ. ed.: Khaydegger M. Razgovor na proselochnoy doroge. Moscow, Vysshaya Shkola Publ., 1991. 192 p.).
  3. Heidegger M. Sein und Zeit. Halle, Max Niemeyer, 1927. 438 S. (Russ. ed.: Khaydegger M. Bytie i vremya. Moscow, Ad Marginem Publ., 1997. 452 p.).
  4. Bradshaw D. Aristotle East and West: Metaphysics and the Division of Christendom. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2004. 298 p. (Russ. ed.: Bredshou D. Aristotel’ na Vostoke i na Zapade: Metafi zika i razdelenie hristianskogo mira. Moscow, Yazyki slavyanskih kul’tur Publ., 2012. 384 p.).
  5. Aristotle. The Metaphysics. London, Penguin Classics, 1999. 528 p. (Russ. ed.: Aristotel’. Sochineniya: v 4 t. Moscow, Nauka Publ., 1975. Vol. 1. 550 p.).
  6. Brentano F. On the Several Senses of Being in Aristotle. Berkeley, University of California Press, 1975. 197 p. (Russ. ed.: Brentano Fr. O mnogoznachnosti sushchego po Aristotelyu. St. Petersburg, Izdatel’stvo Instituta “Vysshaya religiozno-fi losofskaya shkola”, 2012. 247 p.).
  7. Safranski R. Ein Meister aus Deutschland. A master from Germany. Heidegger und seine Zeit. Heidegger and his time. Munchen ua, Hanser; Munich, Hanser, 1994. 537 S. (Russ. ed.: Safranski R. Khaydegger: germanskij master i ego vremya. Moscow, Molodaya gvardiya Publ., 2005. 614 p.).
  8. Hegel G. W. F. Science of Logic. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2010. 863 p. (Russ. ed.: Gegel’ G. V. F. Nauka logiki. Moscow, Mysl’ Publ., 1999. 1072 p.).